No
one in the mainstream media has performed the essential function of
exposing the details of Barack Obama’s sordid political history
pre-dating his 2004 run for the United States Senate. Virtually every
other President in modern time has had his life’s history investigated
in detail and published, but not Barack Obama, the darling of the liberal
media. Barack Obama’s background remains, for most Americans,
a mystery. With the publication of former New York Times Magazine editor
Edward Klein’s biography, The Amateur, as well as select
pieces in other publications, including The Washington Times, National
Review, and World News Daily, we can now see that Obama’s education
in politics and political affiliations took him not to the far left
but beyond, to those who view America as an evil colonial power that
has to be humbled economically and politically before it can become
part of a grand international community of socialist states.

Klein’s
book is filled with details recording Obama’s radical political
affiliations. After losing his first run for national office, a failed
attempt at unseating Illinois Congressman Bobby Rush from Chicago’s
South Side (a former Black Panther), Obama turned to Jesse Jackson for
an education on national politics. At his Operation PUSH [People United
to Save Humanity], Jackson urged Obama to speak at PUSH every Saturday,
which Obama did do, honing his public speaking skills. Although Jackson
gave Obama a chance to hone his speaking skills, the ideological direction
for Obama, and even the manner in which Obama spoke to audiences, came
more from the influences of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the anti-American
theologian whose rhetoric is so patently offensive in its condemnation
of basic American ideals that it forced Obama chief strategist David
Axelrod to cancel Wright’s planned invocation for Obama at Obama’s
February 10, 2007, announcement of his candidacy for President in Springfield,
Illinois. Obama married Michelle Robinson in Wright’s Trinity
United Church of Christ in 1991 but had been a devout follower of Wright
for many years before that. Wright advocates Black Liberation Theology,
whereby he contends that Blacks are still very much oppressed by Whites
in America and calls for a massive redistribution of wealth to give
Blacks parity with Whites in what is Marxism along racial lines.

Writes
Klein: “Echoes of Jeremiah Wright’s Marxist ideology can
be found in many of Obama’s remarks. For instance, when Obama
says, ‘I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good
for everybody,’ he is channeling Jeremiah Wright . . . . Wright’s
influence on Obama was unrivaled for more than twenty years . . . .
Wright became far more than a religious and spiritual guide to Obama;
he was his substitute father, life coach, and political inspiration
wrapped in one package.”

Obama
dutifully attended Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ, listening
week after week to Wright’s demagogic anti-American sermons such
as the following from the pulpit in reference to African-Americans:
“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes
the three-strike law, and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’
No! No! No! Not God bless America [but] G_ _ Da_ _ America!” Anyone
with an ounce of respect for this nation and of Christianity would find
this profanity more than enough to justify severing all ties with Wright
and his church, but Obama remained tied to Wright, staying in the congregation
and seeking after his advice for over twenty years. This is akin to
a White President being closely associated with the Ku Klux Klan. While
no doubt the media would excoriate and condemn such a person, and rightly
so, when it comes to racism against Whites in the form of Wright’s
theology, Obama is given a free pass.

Klein
finds ample evidence of Obama’s narcissism. Obama’s narcissism
appears to temper his politics, leading him while still re-electable
to favor positions less extreme than his heart desires. Many liberals
who favor massive redistribution of wealth and a liberal social agenda
have been disappointed thus far and therefore describe Obama as a centrist
rather than a liberal. Conservatives solidly view him as a liberal who
has done more than enough to justify that appellation. Truth be told,
Obama is for Obama before he is for the nation, and he is for a European
style socialist America before the America defined by the Constitution,
but he is constrained from achieving the latter by the former.

Recent
evidence of his love affair with socialism is coming to the fore thanks
to reporting by The Washington Times, National Review, and World News
Daily. In January 1996, Obama became directly associated with the New
Party, which is an ACORN-affiliated political party that favors adoption
of European-style socialism in the United States. In 2008 and again
in recent days the Obama campaign refuted the charge that Obama was
actually a “member” of the New Party, but that is a superficial
objection. The evidence reveals that Obama closely associated himself
with the New Party and also with the Democratic Socialists of America.
He spoke at a Democratic Socialists of America event in Chicago’s
Ida Noyes Hall Cloister Club on February 25, 1996. He appeared on the
front cover of a New Party pamphlet in 1996. WND.com reporter Aaron
Klein writes: “While Obama’s campaign in 2008 denied the
then–presidential candidate was ever an actual member of the New
Party, print copies of the New Party News, the party’s official
newspaper, show Obama posing with New Party leaders, listing him as
a New Party member and printing quotes from him as a member.

The
party’s spring 1996 newspaper boasted: ‘New Party members
won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State
Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia
Martin (Cook County Judiciary).’ . . . . The newspaper lists other
politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as
a New Party member. New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago’s Democratic
Socialists of America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that
Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which
he expressed his gratitude for the group’s support and ‘encouraged
NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on voter education
and voter registration.’”

Subscribe
to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter
Your E-Mail Address:

The
fact is, if re-elected and thus loosed from a need to appease the public
to achieve re-election, Obama can be Obama. That means he can return
to his radical political roots of extreme, anti-American liberalism.
What America must fear with the re-election of Barack Obama is that
he will bring about changes through bureaucratic means (if not achievable
through democratic ones) that dramatically increase government control
over everything. Since his earliest days in politics, since his protests
in college, Obama has wanted to humble America, to punish it for its
alleged exercise of colonial power and to tame capitalism as the Europeans
have at the expense of their economies. If Obama is re-elected, he will
have virtually no constraint on his exercise of will to achieve those
objectives to our grave detriment.

Jonathan
W. Emord is an attorney who practices constitutional and administrative
law before the federal courts and agencies. Congressman Ron Paul calls
Jonathan “a hero of the health freedom revolution” and says
“all freedom-loving Americans are in [his] debt . . . for his courtroom
[victories] on behalf of health freedom.” He has defeated the FDA
in federal court a remarkable eight times, six on First Amendment
grounds, and is the author of Amazon bestsellers The
Rise of Tyranny, Global
Censorship of Health Information,
and Restore
the Republic. He is also the American Justice columnist for
U.S.A. Today Magazine. For more info visit Emord.com.

The
fact is, if re-elected and thus loosed from a need to appease the public
to achieve re-election, Obama can be Obama. That means he can return to
his radical political roots of extreme, anti-American liberalism.